High Court Battle Over Sex and Privacy
April 29 -- When the bedroom door is closed, does the government have to keep out?
When applied to gay couples, the question has provoked a political furor and a landmark legal battle is now before the Supreme Court. At issue is whether the government can outlaw what some citizens do in the privacy of their own homes.
"It's really about equality. What does it mean to be an equal citizen in this country?" says Jack Balkin, a Yale Law School professor. "Part of it is the right to love who you want to love."
Those on the other side of the issue agree that the fundamental issues are at stake.
"The idea of a society with an anything-goes sexuality is unprecedented," said Scott Lively, director of the Pro-Family Law Center in Citrus Heights, Calif., warning of "deep social problems" if gay rights are upheld.
Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., stirred up the debate last week, ahead of the Supreme Court ruling, by saying sex between two men was not constitutionally protected and was harmful to society.
"If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything," Santorum said. "Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does."
His remarks drew fire from Democrats, gay rights advocates, and some members of his own party, but he was also applauded by several conservative groups.
Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, said she believed Santorum's "unfortunate remarks undermine Republican principles of inclusion and opportunity."
"I find it personally offensive, and I think there are lots of moderate, moderate Americans across the country who do find it offensive," said Mike Stara, the state president for the Pennsylvania Log Cabin Republicans club, an advocacy group for Gay Republicans.
David Smith of the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights group, said Santorum's comments reflected prejudice.
